GRGR(4) more Jess (formerly Re[2]: Pavlov and the Book)

[Paul Mackin]

Tom is right. There is more to life than statistics.

But speaking of which, Pointsman has good reason (besides the stated
one) for fearing numbers between one and zero. One of the main reasons
for keeping a statistician around an experimental lab is to measure sampling
error (not that much can be done about it). Quickly calculate, someone, the
error in a sample of one (assuming it was random, of course, which it never is).

Was the sampling problem the reason Spectro objected to Pointsman's
proposal?

Also,  isn't Pointsman completely off the track in his qualms stated on p.55?
The part about the assumpion of "the presence of these bi-stable points"
is true enough at the cellular level (the all-or-nothing principle). However the reflex itself would be graded in intensity. Not all cells are doing the same thing at the same time.

Pointsman seems to carrying to extremes the principle that all
physiology is cellular.

But what the heck, it's auhor's licence.

				P.

----------
From: 	Tom Stanton
Sent: 	Saturday, November 09, 1996 1:28 PM
To: 	Pynchon List
Subject: 	Re: GRGR(4) more Jess (formerly Re[2]: Pavlov and the Book)

> [Paul Mackin sez]
> >This isn't meant to imply is it that there is anything special about the
> >FIRST throw compared, say, with the second, third, fourth or
> >whatever your favorite numbered throw is?

> [David sez] 
> Roger Mexico would say that too...

A bullseye on the 1st throw isn't statistically significant,
true, but it's a nice dramatic touch. How about all those
rockets exploding around them? Not significant from Mexico's
point of view, but it sets up the cute meeting and then
keeps them together in the flat.